Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Version 00.1
February 3, 2003
Niels Walet
c
Copyright 1999 by Niels Walet, UMIST, Manchester, U.K.
2
Contents
1 Introduction 7
3 Experimental tools 19
3.1 Accelerators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.1.1 Resolving power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.1.2 Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.1.3 DC fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
3.2 Targets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.3 The main experimental facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3.3.1 SLAC (B factory, Babar) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.3.2 Fermilab (D0 and CDF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.3.3 CERN (LEP and LHC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.3.4 Brookhaven (RHIC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.3.5 Cornell (CESR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.3.6 DESY (Hera and Petra) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
3.3.7 KEK (tristan) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.3.8 IHEP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.4 Detectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.4.1 Scintillation counters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.4.2 Proportional/Drift Chamber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3.4.3 Semiconductor detectors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3.4.4 Spectrometer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3.4.5 Čerenkov Counters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3.4.6 Transition radiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3.4.7 Calorimeters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
3
4 CONTENTS
4 Nuclear Masses 31
4.1 Experimental facts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.1.1 mass spectrograph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.2 Interpretation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.3 Deeper analysis of nuclear masses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
4.4 Nuclear mass formula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4.5 Stability of nuclei . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
4.5.1 β decay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
4.6 properties of nuclear states . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
4.6.1 quantum numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
4.6.2 deuteron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
4.6.3 Scattering of nucleons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
4.6.4 Nuclear Forces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
5 Nuclear models 41
5.1 Nuclear shell model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
5.1.1 Mechanism that causes shell structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
5.1.2 Modeling the shell structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
5.1.3 evidence for shell structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5.2 Collective models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5.2.1 Liquid drop model and mass formula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
5.2.2 Equilibrium shape & deformation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
5.2.3 Collective vibrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
5.2.4 Collective rotations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
5.3 Fission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
5.4 Barrier penetration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
10 Relativistic kinematics 75
10.1 Lorentz transformations of energy and momentum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
10.2 Invariant mass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
10.3 Transformations between CM and lab frame . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
10.4 Elastic-inelastic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
10.5 Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
6 CONTENTS
Chapter 1
Introduction
In this course I shall discuss nuclear and particle physics on a somewhat phenomenological level. The mathe-
matical sophistication shall be rather limited, with an emphasis on the physics and on symmetry aspects.
Course text:
W.E. Burcham and M. Jobes, Nuclear and Particle Physics, Addison Wesley Longman Ltd, Harlow, 1995.
Supplementary references
1. B.R. Martin and G. Shaw, Particle Physics, John Wiley and sons, Chicester, 1996. A solid book on
particle physics, slighly more advanced than this course.
2. G.D. Coughlan and J.E. Dodd, The ideas of particle physics, Cambridge University Press, 1991. A more
hand waving but more exciting introduction to particle physics. Reasonably up to date.
3. N.G. Cooper and G.B. West (eds.), Particle Physics: A Los Alamos Primer, Cambridge University Press,
1988. A bit less up to date, but very exciting and challenging book.
4. R. C. Fernow, Introduction to experimental Particle Physics, Cambridge University Press. 1986. A good
source for experimental techniques and technology. A bit too advanced for the course.
5. F. Halzen and A.D. Martin, Quarks and Leptons: An introductory Course in particle physics, John Wiley
and Sons, New York, 1984. A graduate level text book.
6. F.E. Close, An introduction to Quarks and Partons, Academic Press, London, 1979. Another highly
recommendable graduate text.
7
8 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
9
10 CHAPTER 2. A HISTORY OF PARTICLE PHYSICS
Chapter 2
1944 RABI, ISIDOR ISAAC, U.S.A., Columbia Uni- ”for his resonance method for recording the
versity, New York, NY, b. 1898, (in Rymanow, magnetic properties of atomic nuclei”
then Austria-Hungary) d. 1988:
1945 PAULI, WOLFGANG, Austria, Princeton Uni- ”for the discovery of the Exclusion Principle,
versity, NJ, U.S.A., b. 1900, d. 1958: also called the Pauli Principle”
1948 BLACKETT, Lord PATRICK MAYNARD ”for his development of the Wilson cloud cham-
STUART, Great Britain, Victoria University, ber method, and his discoveries therewith in
Manchester, b. 1897, d. 1974: the fields of nuclear physics and cosmic radia-
tion”
1949 YUKAWA, HIDEKI, Japan, Kyoto Impe- ”for his prediction of the existence of mesons on
rial University and Columbia University, New the basis of theoretical work on nuclear forces”
York, NY, U.S.A., b. 1907, d. 1981:
1950 POWELL, CECIL FRANK, Great Britain, ”for his development of the photographic
Bristol University, b. 1903, d. 1969: method of studying nuclear processes and his
discoveries regarding mesons made with this
method”
1951 COCKCROFT, Sir JOHN DOUGLAS, Great ”for their pioneer work on the transmutation of
Britain, Atomic Energy Research Establish- atomic nuclei by artificially accelerated atomic
ment, Harwell, Didcot, Berks., b. 1897, particles”
d. 1967; and WALTON, ERNEST THOMAS
SINTON, Ireland, Dublin University, b. 1903,
d. 1995:
1955 LAMB, WILLIS EUGENE, U.S.A., Stanford ”for his discoveries concerning the fine struc-
University, Stanford, CA, b. 1913: ture of the hydrogen spectrum”; and
KUSCH, POLYKARP, U.S.A., Columbia Uni- ”for his precision determination of the mag-
versity, New York, NY, b. 1911 (in Blanken- netic moment of the electron”
burg, then Germany), d. 1993:
1957 YANG, CHEN NING, China, Institute for Ad- ”for their penetrating investigation of the so-
vanced Study, Princeton, NJ, U.S.A., b. 1922; called parity laws which has led to important
and LEE, TSUNG-DAO, China, Columbia discoveries regarding the elementary particles”
University, New York, NY, U.S.A., b. 1926:
1959 SEGRÉ, EMILIO GINO, U.S.A., University of ”for their discovery of the antiproton”
California, Berkeley, CA, b. 1905 (in Tivoli,
Italy), d. 1989; and CHAMBERLAIN, OWEN,
U.S.A., University of California, Berkeley, CA,
b. 1920:
1960 GLASER, DONALD A., U.S.A., University of ”for the invention of the bubble chamber”
California, Berkeley, CA, b. 1926:
1961 HOFSTADTER, ROBERT, U.S.A., Stanford ”for his pioneering studies of electron scattering
University, Stanford, CA, b. 1915, d. 1990: in atomic nuclei and for his thereby achieved
discoveries concerning the stucture of the nu-
cleons”; and
MÖSSBAUER, RUDOLF LUDWIG, Ger- ”for his researches concerning the resonance ab-
many, Technische Hochschule, Munich, and sorption of gamma radiation and his discovery
California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, in this connection of the effect which bears his
CA, U.S.A., b. 1929: name”
1963 WIGNER, EUGENE P., U.S.A., Princeton ”for his contributions to the theory of the
University, Princeton, NJ, b. 1902 (in Bu- atomic nucleus and the elementary particles,
dapest, Hungary), d. 1995: particularly through the discovery and appli-
cation of fundamental symmetry principles”;
GOEPPERT-MAYER, MARIA, U.S.A., Uni- ”for their discoveries concerning nuclear shell
versity of California, La Jolla, CA, b. 1906 structure”
(in Kattowitz, then Germany), d. 1972; and
JENSEN, J. HANS D., Germany, University of
Heidelberg, b. 1907, d. 1973:
12 CHAPTER 2. A HISTORY OF PARTICLE PHYSICS
1965 TOMONAGA, SIN-ITIRO, Japan, Tokyo, ”for their fundamental work in quantum
University of Education, Tokyo, b. 1906, d. electrodynamics, with deep-ploughing conse-
1979; quences for the physics of elementary particles”
SCHWINGER, JULIAN, U.S.A., Harvard Uni-
versity, Cambridge, MA, b. 1918, d. 1994; and
FEYNMAN, RICHARD P., U.S.A., Califor-
nia Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, b.
1918, d. 1988:
1967 BETHE, HANS ALBRECHT, U.S.A., Cornell ”for his contributions to the theory of nuclear
University, Ithaca, NY, b. 1906 (in Strasbourg, reactions, especially his discoveries concerning
then Germany): the energy production in stars”
1968 ALVAREZ, LUIS W., U.S.A., University of ”for his decisive contributions to elementary
California, Berkeley, CA, b. 1911, d. 1988: particle physics, in particular the discovery of a
large number of resonance states, made possi-
ble through his development of the technique of
using hydrogen bubble chamber and data anal-
ysis”
1969 GELL-MANN, MURRAY, U.S.A., California ”for his contributions and discoveries concern-
Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, b. ing the classification of elementary particles
1929: and their interactions”
1975 BOHR, AAGE, Denmark, Niels Bohr Institute, ”for the discovery of the connection between
Copenhagen, b. 1922; collective motion and particle motion in atomic
MOTTELSON, BEN, Denmark, Nordita, nuclei and the development of the theory of the
Copenhagen, b. 1926 (in Chicago, U.S.A.); and structure of the atomic nucleus based on this
RAINWATER, JAMES, U.S.A., Columbia connection”
University, New York, NY, b. 1917, d. 1986:
1976 RICHTER, BURTON, U.S.A., Stanford Linear ”for their pioneering work in the discovery of a
Accelerator Center, Stanford, CA, b. 1931; heavy elementary particle of a new kind”
TING, SAMUEL C. C., U.S.A., Massachusetts
Institute of Technology (MIT), Cambridge,
MA, (European Center for Nuclear Research,
Geneva, Switzerland), b. 1936:
1979 GLASHOW, SHELDON L., U.S.A., Lyman ”for their contributions to the theory of the uni-
Laboratory, Harvard University, Cambridge, fied weak and electromagnetic interaction be-
MA, b. 1932; tween elementary particles, including inter alia
SALAM, ABDUS, Pakistan, International the prediction of the weak neutral current”
Centre for Theoretical Physics, Trieste, and
Imperial College of Science and Technology,
London, Great Britain, b. 1926, d. 1996; and
WEINBERG, STEVEN, U.S.A., Harvard Uni-
versity, Cambridge, MA, b. 1933:
1980 CRONIN, JAMES, W., U.S.A., University of ”for the discovery of violations of fundamental
Chicago, Chicago, IL, b. 1931; and symmetry principles in the decay of neutral K-
FITCH, VAL L., U.S.A., Princeton University, mesons”
Princeton, NJ, b. 1923:
1983 CHANDRASEKHAR, SUBRAMANYAN, ”for his theoretical studies of the physical pro-
U.S.A., University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, b. cesses of importance to the structure and evo-
1910 (in Lahore, India), d. 1995: lution of the stars”
FOWLER, WILLIAM A., U.S.A., California ”for his theoretical and experimental studies
Institute of Technology, Pasadena, CA, b. of the nuclear reactions of importance in the
1911, d. 1995: formation of the chemical elements in the uni-
verse”
2.1. NOBEL PRICES IN PARTICLE PHYSICS 13
1984 RUBBIA, CARLO, Italy, CERN, Geneva, ”for their decisive contributions to the large
Switzerland, b. 1934; and project, which led to the discovery of the field
VAN DER MEER, SIMON, the Netherlands, particles W and Z, communicators of weak in-
CERN, Geneva, Switzerland, b. 1925: teraction”
1988 LEDERMAN, LEON M., U.S.A., Fermi Na- ”for the neutrino beam method and the demon-
tional Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, IL, b. stration of the doublet structure of the leptons
1922; through the discovery of the muon neutrino”
SCHWARTZ, MELVIN, U.S.A., Digital Path-
ways, Inc., Mountain View, CA, b. 1932; and
STEINBERGER, JACK, U.S.A., CERN,
Geneva, Switzerland, b. 1921 (in Bad Kissin-
gen, FRG):
1990 FRIEDMAN, JEROME I., U.S.A., Mas- ”for their pioneering investigations concerning
sachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, deep inelastic scattering of electrons on protons
MA, b. 1930; and bound neutrons, which have been of es-
KENDALL, HENRY W., U.S.A., Mas- sential importance for the development of the
sachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, quark model in particle physics”
MA, b. 1926; and
TAYLOR, RICHARD E., Canada, Stanford
University, Stanford, CA, U.S.A., b. 1929:
1992 CHARPAK, GEORGES, France, École ”for his invention and development of particle
Supèrieure de Physique et Chimie, Paris and detectors, in particular the multiwire propor-
CERN, Geneva, Switzerland, b. 1924 ( in tional chamber”
Poland):
1995 ”for pioneering experimental contributions to
lepton physics”
PERL, MARTIN L., U.S.A., Stanford Univer- ”for the discovery of the tau lepton”
sity, Stanford, CA, U.S.A., b. 1927,
REINES, FREDERICK, U.S.A., University of ”for the detection of the neutrino”
California at Irvine, Irvine, CA, U.S.A., b.
1918, d. 1998:
14 CHAPTER 2. A HISTORY OF PARTICLE PHYSICS
realized that it interacts too weakly to be the pion and is actually a lepton (electron-like particle) called the
µ. The π is found (in cosmic rays) and is the progenitor of the µ’s that were seen before:
π + → µ+ + νµ (2.2)
The next year artificial pions are produced in an accelerator, and in 1950 the neutral pion is found,
π 0 → γγ. (2.3)
This is an example of the conservation of electric charge. Already in 1938 Stuckelberg had found that there
are other conserved quantities: the number of baryons (n and p and . . . ) is also conserved!
After a serious break in the work during the latter part of WWII, activity resumed again. The theory of
electrons and positrons interacting through the electromagnetic field (photons) was tackled seriously, and with
important contributions of (amongst others) Tomonaga, Schwinger and Feynman was developed into a highly
accurate tool to describe hyperfine structure.
Experimental activity also resumed. Cosmic rays still provided an important source of extremely energetic
particles, and in 1947 a “strange” particle (K + was discovered through its very peculiar decay pattern. Balloon
experiments led to additional discoveries: So-called V particles were found, which were neutral particles,
identified as the Λ0 and K 0 . It was realized that a new conserved quantity had been found. It was called
strangeness.
The technological development around WWII led to an explosion in the use of accelerators, and more and
more particles were found. A few of the important ones are the antiproton, which was first seen in 1955, and
the ∆, a very peculiar excited state of the nucleon, that comes in four charge states ∆++ , ∆+ , ∆0 , ∆− .
Theory was develop-ping rapidly as well. A few highlights: In 1954 Yang and Mills develop the concept of
gauged Yang-Mills fields. It looked like a mathematical game at the time, but it proved to be the key tool in
developing what is now called “the standard model”.
In 1956 Yang and Lee make the revolutionary suggestion that parity is not necessarily conserved in the
weak interactions. In the same year “madam” CS Wu and Alder show experimentally that this is true: God
is weakly left-handed!
In 1957 Schwinger, Bludman and Glashow suggest that all weak interactions (radioactive decay) are me-
diated by the charged bosons W ± . In 1961 Gell-Mann and Ne’eman introduce the “eightfold way”: a mathe-
matical taxonomy to organize the particle zoo.
e νe (u, d)
(2.4)
µ νµ (s, c)
Experimental tools
In this chapter we shall concentrate on the experimental tools used in nuclear and particle physics. Mainly
the present ones, but it is hard to avoid discussing some of the history.
3.1 Accelerators
3.1.1 Resolving power
Both nuclear and particle physics experiments are typically performed at accelerators, where particles are
accelerated to extremely high energies, in most cases relativistic (i.e., v ≈ c). To understand why this happens
we need to look at the rôle the accelerators play. Accelerators are nothing but extremely big microscopes. At
ultrarelativistic energies it doesn’t really matter what the mass of the particle is, its energy only depends on
the momentum: p
E = hν = m2 c4 + p2 c2 ≈ pc (3.1)
from which we conclude that
c h
λ= = . (3.2)
ν p
The typical resolving power of a microscope is about the size of one wave-length, λ. For an an ultrarelativistic
particle this implies an energy of
c
E = pc = h (3.3)
λ
You may not immediately appreciate the enormous scale of these energies. An energy of 1 TeV (= 1012 eV) is
3 × 10−7 J, which is the same as the kinetic energy of a 1g particle moving at 1.7 cm/s. And that for particles
that are of submicroscopic size! We shall thus have to push these particles very hard indeed to gain such
energies. In order to push these particles we need a handle to grasp hold of. The best one we know of is to
use charged particles, since these can be accelerated with a combination of electric and magnetic fields – it is
easy to get the necessary power as well.
3.1.2 Types
We can distinguish accelerators in two ways. One is whether the particles are accelerated along straight lines
or along (approximate) circles. The other distinction is whether we used a DC (or slowly varying AC) voltage,
or whether we use radio-frequency AC voltage, as is the case in most modern accelerators.
19
20 CHAPTER 3. EXPERIMENTAL TOOLS
3.1.3 DC fields
Acceleration in a DC field is rather straightforward: If we have two plates with a potential V between them,
and release a particle near the plate at lower potential it will be accelerated to an energy 12 mv 2 = eV . This
was the original technique that got Cockroft and Wolton their Nobel prize.
belt
Cyclotron
The original design for a circular accelerator dates back to the 1930’s, and is called a cyclotron. Like all circular
accelerators it is based on the fact that a charged particle (charge qe) in a magnetic field B with velocity v
3.1. ACCELERATORS 21
γmv 2
qvB = , (3.4)
r
where γm is the relativistic mass, γ = (1 − β 2 )−1/2 , β = v/c. A cyclotron consists of two metal “D”-rings,
in which the particles are shielded from electric fields, and an electric field is applied between the two rings,
changing sign for each half-revolution. This field then accelerates the particles.
The field has to change with a frequency equal to the angular velocity,
ω v qB
f= = = . (3.5)
2π 2πr 2πγm
For non-relativistic particles, where γ ≈ 1, we can thus run a cyclotron at constant frequency, 15.25 MHz/T
for protons. Since we extract the particles at the largest radius possible, we can determine the velocity and
thus the energy,
E = γmc2 = [(qBRc)2 + m2 c4 ]1/2 (3.6)
Synchroton
The shear size of a cyclotron that accelerates particles to 100 GeV or more would be outrageous. For that
reason a different type of accelerator is used for higher energy, the so-called synchroton where the particles are
accelerated in a circle of constant diameter.
22 CHAPTER 3. EXPERIMENTAL TOOLS
bending
magnet
gap for
acceleration
In a circular accelerator (also called synchroton), see Fig. 3.5, we have a set of magnetic elements that
bend the beam of charged into an almost circular shape, and empty regions in between those elements where
a high frequency electro-magnetic field accelerates the particles to ever higher energies. The particles make
many passes through the accelerator, at every increasing momentum. This makes critical timing requirements
on the accelerating fields, they cannot remain constant.
Using the equations given above, we find that
qB qBc2 qBc2
f= = = (3.7)
2πγm 2πE 2π(m c + q 2 B 2 R2 c2 )1/2
2 4
Table 3.2: Energy loss for a proton or electron in a synchroton of radius 5km
proton E ∆E
1 GeV 1.5 × 10−11 eV
10 GeV 1.5 × 10−7 eV
100 GeV 1.5 × 10−3 eV
1000 GeV 1.5 × 101 eV
electron E ∆E
1 GeV 2.2 × 102 eV
10 GeV 2.2 MeV
100 GeV 22 GeV
1000 GeV 2.2 × 1015 GeV
Table 3.3: Radius R of an synchroton for given magnetic fields and momenta.
B p R
1T 1 GeV/c 3.3 m
10 GeV/c 33 m
100 GeV/c 330 m
1000 GeV/c 3.3 km
5T 1 GeV/c 0.66 m
10 GeV/c 6.6 m
100 GeV/c 66 m
1000 GeV/c 660 m
3.2 Targets
There are two ways to make the necessary collisions with the accelerated beam: Fixed target and colliding
beams.
In fixed target mode the accelerated beam hits a target which is fixed in the laboratory. Relativistic
kinematics tells us that if a particle in the beam collides with a particle in the target, their centre-of-mass
(four) momentum is conserved. The only energy remaining for the reaction is the relative energy (or energy
within the cm frame). This can be expressed as
1/2
ECM = m2b c4 + mt2 c4 + 2mt c2 EL (3.14)
where mb is the mass of a beam particle, mt is the mass of a target particle and EL is the beam energy as
measured in the laboratory. as we increase EL we can ignore the first tow terms in the square root and we
find that
p
ECM ≈ 2mt c2 EL , (3.15)
and thus the centre-of-mass energy only increases as the square root of the lab energy!
In the case of colliding beams we use the fact that we have (say) an electron beam moving one way, and a
positron beam going in the opposite direction. Since the centre of mass is at rest, we have the full energy of
both beams available,
ECM = 2EL . (3.16)
This grows linearly with lab energy, so that a factor two increase in the beam energy also gives
√ a factor two
increase in the available energy to produce new particles! We would only have gained a factor 2 for the case
of a fixed target. This is the reason that almost all modern facilities are colliding beams.
3.3.8 IHEP
Institute for High-Energy Physics, in the People’s Republic of China, performs detailed studies of the tau
lepton and charm quark.
3.4 Detectors
Detectors are used for various measurements on the physical processes occurring in particle physics. The most
important of those are
• To identify particles.
• To measure positions.
• To measure time differences.
26 CHAPTER 3. EXPERIMENTAL TOOLS
• To measure momentum.
• To measure energy.
Let me now go over some of the different pieces of machinery used to perform such measurements
many such wires, we can see where the electrons were produced, and thus measure positions with an accuracy
of 500 µm or less.
3.4.4 Spectrometer
One uses a magnet with a position sensitive detector at the end to bend the track of charged particles, and
determine the radius of the circular orbit. This radius is related to the momentum of the particles.
a) b)
Figure 3.14: Čerenkov radiation
Chapter 4
Nuclear Masses
2. Nuclei of identical charge come in different masses, all approximate multiples of the “nucleon mass”. (Nu-
cleon is the generic term for a neutron or proton, which have almost the same mass, mp = 938.272MeV/c2 ,
mn = MeV/c2 .) Masses can easily be determined by analysing nuclei in a mass spectrograph which can
be used to determine the relation between the charge Z (the number of protons, we believe) vs. the
mass.
Nuclei of identical charge (chemical type) but different mass are called isotopes. Nuclei of approximately the
same mass, but different chemical type, are called isobars.
4.2 Interpretation
We conclude that the nucleus of mass m ≈ AmN contains Z positively charged nucleons (protons) and
N = A − Z neutral nucleons (neutrons). These particles are bound together by the “nuclear force”, which
changes the mass below that of free particles. We shall typically write A El for an element of chemical type El,
which determines Z, containing A nucleons.
With this choice a system is bound when B > 0, when the mass of the nucleus is lower than the mass of its
constituents. Let us first look at this quantity per nucleon as a function of A, see Fig. 4.1
31
32 CHAPTER 4. NUCLEAR MASSES
EB/A (MeV)
6
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
A
This seems to show that to a reasonable degree of approximation the mass is a function of A alone, and
furthermore, that it approaches a constant. This is called nuclear saturation. This agrees with experiment,
which suggests that the radius of a nucleus scales with the 1/3rd power of A,
This is consistent with the saturation hypothesis made by Gamov in the 30’s:
1. Bulk energy: This is the term studied above, and saturation implies that the energy is proportional to
Bbulk = αA.
2. Surface energy: Nucleons at the surface of the nuclear sphere have less neighbours, and should feel less
attraction. Since the surface area goes with R2 , we find Bsurface = −βA.
3. Pauli or symmetry energy: nucleons are fermions (will be discussed later). That means that they
cannot occupy the same states, thus reducing the binding. This is found to be proportional to Bsymm =
−γ(N/2 − Z/2)2 /A2 .
4. Coulomb energy: protons are charges and they repel. The average distance between is related to the
radius of the nucleus, the number of interaction is roughly Z 2 (or Z(Z − 1)). We have to include the
term BCoul = −Z 2 /A.
100
80
60
12
8
40 4
0
20 -4
-8
N
25 50 75 100 125 150
Figure 4.2: Difference between fitted binding energies and experimental values, as a function of N and Z.
to all know nuclear binding energies with A ≥ 16 (the formula is not so good for light nuclei). The fit results
are given in table 4.1.
In Fig. 4.3 we show how well this fit works. There remains a certain amount of structure, see below, as well
as a strong difference between neighbouring nuclei. This is due to the superfluid nature of nuclear material:
nucleons of opposite momenta tend to anti-align their spins, thus gaining energy. The solution is to add a
pairing term to the binding energy,
(
A−1/2 for N odd, Z odd
Bpair = −1/2
(4.9)
−A for N even, Z even
The results including this term are significantly better, even though all other parameters remain at the same
position, see Table 4.2. Taking all this together we fit the formula
parameter value
α 15.36 MeV
β 16.32 MeV
γ 90.46 MeV
δ 11.32 MeV
0.6929 MeV
34 CHAPTER 4. NUCLEAR MASSES
100
80
60
12
8
40 4
0
20 -4
-8
N
25 50 75 100 125 150
Figure 4.3: Difference between fitted binding energies and experimental values, as a function of N and Z.
10
∆EB (MeV)
-10
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
A
100
80
60
40
20
N
25 50 75 100 125 150
56.00
Ga 149.98
Lu
Ca
55.98 149.96
mass (amu)
Cs Yb
mass (amu)
Sc Zn
Tm
Ba
55.96 Ti Cu 149.94 La Er
V Ce Ho
Pr Dy
Cr Ni Pm Eu Tb
55.94 Mn Co 149.92
Fe
Nd Sm Gd
55.92 149.90
20 25 30 55 60 65 70
Z Z
Figure 4.6: A cross section through the mass table for fixed A. To the left, A = 56, and to the right, A = 150.
4.5.1 β decay
If we look at fixed nucleon number A, we can see that the masses vary strongly,
It is known that a free neutron is not a stable particle, it actually decays by emission of an electron and
an antineutrino,
n → p + e− + ν̄e . (4.11)
The reason that this reaction can take place is that it is endothermic, mn c2 > mp c2 + me c2 . (Here we assume
that the neutrino has no mass.) The degree of allowance of such a reaction is usually expressed in a Q value,
the amount of energy released in such a reaction,
Generically it is found that two reaction may take place, depending on the balance of masses. Either a neutron
“β decays” as sketched above, or we have the inverse reaction
p → n + e+ + νe . (4.13)
For historical reason the electron or positron emitted in such a process is called a β particle. Thus in β − decay
of a nucleus, a nucleus of Z protons and N neutrons turns into one of Z + 1 protons and N − 1 neutrons
(moving towards the right in Fig. 4.6). In β + decay the nucleus moves to the left. Since in that figure I am
using atomic masses, the Q factor is
The double electron mass contribution in this last equation because the atom looses one electron, as well as
emits a positron with has the same mass as the electron.
In similar ways we can study the fact whether reactions where a single nucleon (neutron or proton) is
emitted, as well as those where more complicated objects, such as Helium nuclei (α particles) are emitted. I
shall return to such processed later, but let us note the Q values,
M L
Figure 4.7: A pictorial representation of the “quantum precession” of an angular momentum of fixed length L
and projection M .
angular momentum
One of the key invariances of the laws of physics is rotational invariance, i.e., physics is independent of the
direction you are looking at. This leads to the introduction of a vector angular momentum operator,
L̂ = r̂ × p̂, (4.16)
which generates rotations. As we shall see later quantum states are not necessarily invariant under the rotation,
but transform in a well-defined way. The three operators L̂x , L̂y and L̂z satisfy a rather intriguing structure,
and the same for q cyclic permutation of indices (xyz → yzx or zxy). This shows that we cannot determine all
three components simultaneously in a quantum state. One normally only calculates the length of the angular
momentum vector, and its projection on the z axis,
2
L̂ φLM = ~2 L(L + 1)φLM ,
L̂z φLM = ~Lz φLM . (4.18)
It can be shown that L is a non-negative integer, and M is an integer satisfying |M | < L, i.e., the projection
is always smaller than or equal to the length, a rather simple statement in classical mechanics.
The standard, albeit slightly simplified, picture of this process is that of a fixed length angular momentum
precessing about the z axis, keeping the projection fixed, as shown in Fig. 4.7.
The energy of a quantum state is independent of the M quantum number, since the physics is independent
of the orientation of L in space (unless we apply a magnetic field that breaks this symmetry). We just find
multiplets of 2L + 1 states with the same energy and value of L, differing only in M .
Unfortunately the story does not end here. Like electrons, protons and neutron have a spin, i.e., we can use
a magnetic field to separate nucleons with spin up from those with spin down. Spins are like orbital angular
momenta in many aspects, we can write three operators Ŝ that satisfy the same relation as the L̂’s, but we
find that
2 3
Ŝ φS,Sz = ~2 φS,Sz , (4.19)
4
i.e., the length of the spin is 1/2, with projections ±1/2.
Spins will be shown to be coupled to orbital angular momentum to total angular momentum J,
Ĵ = L̂ + Ŝ, (4.20)
and we shall specify the quantum state by L, S, J and Jz . This can be explained pictorially as in Fig. 4.8.
There we show how, for fixed length J the spin and orbital angular momentum precess about the vector J,
4.6. PROPERTIES OF NUCLEAR STATES 37
J
L
y
x
Figure 4.8: A pictorial representation of the vector addition of spin and orbital angular momentum.
which in its turn precesses about the z-axis. It is easy to see that if vecL and S are fully aligned we have
J = L + S, and if they are anti-aligned J = |L − S|. A deeper quantum analysis shows that this is the way the
quantum number work. If the angular momentum quantum numbers of the states being coupled are L and S,
the length of the resultant vector J can be
J = |L − S|, |L − S| + 2, . . . , L + S. (4.21)
We have now discussed the angular momentum quantum number for a single particle. For a nucleus which
in principle is made up from many particles, we have to add all these angular momenta together until we
get something called the total angular momentum. Since the total angular momentum of a single particle is
half-integral (why?), the total angular momentum of a nucleus is integer for even A, and half-integer for odd
A.
Parity
Another symmetry of the wave function is parity. If we change r → −r, i.e., mirror space, the laws of physics
are invariant. Since we can do this operation twice and get back where we started from, any eigenvalue of this
operation must be ±1, usually denoted as Π = ±. It can be shown that for a particle with orbital angular
momentum L, Π = (−1)L . The parity of many particles is just the product of the individual parities.
4.6.2 deuteron
Let us think of the deuteron (initially) as a state with L = 0, J = 1, S = 1, usually denoted as 3 S1 (S means
L = 0, the 3 denotes S = 1, i.e., three possible spin orientations, and the subscript 1 the value of J). Let us
38 CHAPTER 4. NUCLEAR MASSES
Mass MeV c 2
20
15
3 2 ;3 2 3 2 ;3 2
3 2 ;3 2 3 2 ;3 2
3 2 ;1 2 3 2 ;1 2
10 3 2 ;1 2 7 2 ;1 2
7 2 ;1 2
5 2 ;1 2 5 2 ;1 2
5 2 ;1 2 5 2 ;1 2
5 7 2 ;1 2
7 2 ;1 2
1 2 ;1 2
1 2 ;1 2 3 2 ;1 2
0 3 2 ;1 2
7 7 7 7
He Li Be B
Figure 4.9: The spectrum of the nuclei with A = 7. The label of each state is J, parity, isospin. The zeroes of
energy were determined by the relative nuclear masses.
model the nuclear force as a three dimensional square well with radius R. The Schrödinger equation for the
spherically symmetric S state is (work in radial coordinates)
~2 1 d 2 d
− r R(r) + V (r)R(r) = ER(r). (4.23)
2µ r2 dr dr
Here V (r) is the potential, and µ is the reduced mass,
mn mp
µ= , (4.24)
mn + mp
which arrises from working in the relative coordinate only. It is easier to work with u(r) = rR(r), which
satisfies the condition
~2 d2
− u(r) + V (r)u(r) = Eu(r), (4.25)
2µ dr2
as well as u(0) = 0. The equation in the interior
~2 d2
− u(r)V0 u(r) = Eu(r), u(0) = 0 (4.26)
2µ dr2
has as solution r
2µ
u = A sin κr, κ= (V0 + E). (4.27)
~2
Outside the well we find the standard damped exponential,
r
2µ
u = B exp(kr), k= (−E). (4.28)
~2
Matching derivatives at the boundary we find
r
k −E
− cot κR = = . (4.29)
κ V0 + E
We shall now make the assumption that |E| V0 , which will prove true. Then we find
r
2µ
κ≈ V0 , cot κR ≈ 0. (4.30)
~2
Since it is known from experiment that the deuteron has only one bound state at energy −2.224573 ±
0.000002 MeV, we see that κR ≈ π/2! Substituting κ we see that
π 2 ~2
V0 R 2 = . (4.31)
8µ
4.6. PROPERTIES OF NUCLEAR STATES 39
0 r (fm)
1 2
Figure 4.10: Possible form for the internucleon potential, repulsive at short distances, and attractive at large
distances.
Emagn = µN µS · B. (4.32)
e~
(The units for this expression is the so-called nuclear magneton, µN = 2mp .) Experimentally we know that
If we compare the measured value for the deuteron, µd = 0.857411 ± 0.000019µN , with the sum of protons
and neutrons (spins aligned), we see that µp + µn = 0.857956 ± 0.00007µN . The close agreement suggest that
the spin assignment is largely OK; the small difference means that our answer cannot be the whole story: we
need other components in the wave function.
We know that an S state is spherically symmetric and cannot have a quadrupole moment, i.e., it does not
have a preferred axis of orientation in an electric field. It is known that the deuteron has a positive quadrupole
moment of 0.29e2 fm2 , corresponding to an elongation of the charge distribution along the spin axis.
From this we conclude that the deuteron wave function carries a small (7%) component of the 3 D1 state
(D: L = 2). We shall discuss later on what this means for the nuclear force.
deflected when it scatters of another nucleon. Let us first look at the deuteron, the bound state of a proton
and a neutron. The quantum numbers of its ground state are J π = 1+ , I = 0. A little bit of additional
analysis shows that this is a state with S = 1, and L = 0 or 2. Naively one would expect a lowest state S = 0,
L = 0 (which must have I = for symmetry reasons not discussed here). So what can we read of about the
nuclear force from this result?
We conclude the following:
1. The nuclear force in the S waves is attractive.
3. The nuclear force is isospin symmetric (i.e., it is independent of the direction of isospin).
Chapter 5
Nuclear models
There are two important classed of nuclear models: single particle and microscopic models, that concentrate
on the individual nucleons and their interactions, and collective models, where we just model the nucleus as a
collective of nucleons, often a nuclear fluid drop.
Microscopic models need to take into account the Pauli principle, which states that no two nucleons can
occupy the same quantum state. This is due to the Fermi-Dirac statistics of spin 1/2 particles, which states
that the wave function is antisymmetric under interchange of any two particles
41
42 CHAPTER 5. NUCLEAR MODELS
126
0i13/2
2p 2p1/2
5hω 1f
1f5/2
2p3/2
0h 1f7/2
0h9/2
82
0h11/2
2s 2s1/2
1d3/2
4hω 1d 1d5/2
0g 0g7/2
50
0g9/2
1p 1p1/2
3hω 0f5/2
0f 1p3/2
0f7/2
20
1s 0d3/2
2hω 0d
1s1/2
0d5/2
8
1hω 0p 0p1/2
0p3/2
2
0hω 0s 0s1/2
~2
− ∆ψ(r) + 21 mω 2 r2 ψ(r) = Eψ(r). (5.1)
2m
The easiest way to solve this equation is to realise that, since r2 = x2 + y 2 + z 2 , the Hamiltonian is actually a
sum of an x, y and z harmonic oscillator, and the eigenvalues are the sum of those three oscillators,
The great disadvantage of this form is that it ignores the rotational invariance of the potential. If we separate
the Schrödinger equation in radial coordinates as
207 209
Pb Pb
7/2-
2
E (MeV)
13/2- 1/2+
5/2+
1 15/2-
3/2-
5/2- 11/2+
0
1/2- 9/2+
207 209
Figure 5.3: The spectra for the one-neutron hole nucleus Pb and the one-particle nucleus Pb.
(a) (b)
126 126
82 82
207 209
Figure 5.4: The shell structure of the one-neutron hole nucleus Pb and the one-particle nucleus Pb.
where the charge distribution is the smeared out charge of the protons,
Z R
4π ρ(r)r2 dr = Ze (5.7)
0
πρ2 R5
= − R5 15
20 3
πZ 2 9e2 4R5 e2 3 Z 2
= 2 6
= . (5.8)
(4π) R 20 15 (4π0 10 R
and the surface area thus increases for both elongations and contractions. Thus the surface energy increases by
the same factor. There is one competing term, however, since the Coulomb energy also changes, the Coulomb
energy goes down, since the particles are further apart,
2
ECoulomb → ECoulomb 1 − (5.13)
5
Monopole
The monopole mode, see Fig. 5.5, is the one where the size of the nuclear fluid oscillates, i.e., where the nucleus
gets compressed. Experimentally one finds that the lowest excitation of this type, which in even-even nuclei
carries the quantum number J π = 0+ , occurs at an energy of roughly
above the ground state. Compared to ordinary nuclear modes, which have energies of a few MeV, these are
indeed high energy modes (15 MeV for A = 216), showing the incompressibility of the nuclear fluid.
Dipole
The dipole mode, Fig. 5.6, by itself is not very interesting: it corresponds to an overall translation of the centre
of the nuclear fluid. One can, however, imagine a two-fluid model where a proton and neutron fluid oscillate
against each other. This is a collective isovector (I = 1) mode. It has quantum numbers J π = 1− , occurs at
an energy of roughly
E0 ≈ 77A−1/3 MeV (5.16)
above the ground state, close to the monopole resonance. It shows that the neutron and proton fluids stick
together quite strongly, and are hard to separate.
Quadrupole
Quadrupole modes, see Fig. 5.7, are the dominant vibrational feature in almost all nuclei. The very special
properties of the lower multipolarities mean that these are the first modes available for low-energy excitations
in nuclei. In almost all even-even nuclei we find a low-lying state (at excitation energy of less than 1 − 2MeV),
46 CHAPTER 5. NUCLEAR MODELS
which carries the quantum numbers J π = 2+ , and near closed shells we can often distinguish the second
harmonic states as well (three states with quantum numbers J π = 0+ , 2+ , 4+ ) .
Octupole
Octupole modes, with J π = 3− , see Fig. 5.8, can be seen in many nuclei. In nuclei where shell-structure makes
quadrupole modes occur at very high energies, such as doubly magic nuclei, the octupole state is often the
lowest excited state.
V(R)
where J is the classical angular momentum. We predict a quantum mechanical spectrum of the form
~2
Erot (J) = J(J + 1), (5.18)
2I
where J is now the angular momentum quantum number. Naively we expect the spectrum to be more
compressed (the moment of inertial is larger) the more elongated the nucleus becomes. It is known that
certain structures in nuclei indeed describe well deformed nuclei, up to super and hyper deformed (axis ratio
from 1 : 1.2 to 1 : 2).
5.3 Fission
Once we have started to look at the liquid drop model, we can try to ask the question what it predicts for
fission, where one can use the liquid drop model to good effect. We are studying how a nuclear fluid drop
separates into two smaller ones, either about the same size, or very different in size.
This process is indicated in Fig. 5.10. The liquid drop elongates, by performing either a quadrupole or
octupole type vibration, but it persists until the nucleus falls apart into two pieces. Since the equilibrium
shape must be stable against small fluctuations, we find that the energy must go up near the spherical form,
as sketched in Fig. 5.11.
In that figure we sketch the energy - which is really the potential energy - for separation into two fragments,
R is the fragment distance. As with any of such processes we can either consider classical fission decays for
energy above the fission barrier, or quantum mechanical tunneling for energies below the barrier. The method
used in fission bombs is to use the former, by hitting a 235 U nucleus with a slow neutron a state with energy
above the barrier is formed, which fissions fast. The fission products are unstable, and emit additional neutrons,
which can give rise to a chain reaction.
The mass formula can be used to give an indication what is going on; Let us look at at the symmetric
fusion of a nucleus. In that case the Q value is
V
B VC
C
R b r
-U
Please evaluate this for 236 U (92 protons). The mass formula fails in prediciting the asymmetry of fission, the
splitting process is much more likely to go into two unequal fragments.
Missing: Picture of asymmetric fusion.
(Z − 2)2e2
VCoulomb (r) = . (5.20)
4π0 r
. The hight of the barrier is exactly the coulomb potential at the boundary, which is the nuclear readius,
RC = 1.2A1.3 fm, and thus BC = 2.4(Z − 2)A−1/3 . The decay probablility across a barrier can be given by
the simple integral expression P = e−2γ , with
Z b
(2µα )1/2
γ = [V (r) − Eα ]1/2 dr
~ RC
Z b 1/2
(2µα )1/2 2(Z − 2)e2
= − Eα dr
~ RC 4π0 r
2
2(Z − 2)e
= [arccos(Eα /BC ) − (Eα /BC )(1 − Eα /BC )] , (5.21)
2π0 ~v
We now come to the first hard part of the class. We’ll try to learn what insights we can gain from the equation
governing relativistic quantum mechanics.
2 4 ∂2
m c + p2 c2 ψ = −~2 2 ψ. (6.4)
∂t
This is an excellent equation for spin-less particles or spin one particles (bosons), but not to describe fermions
(half-integer spin), since there is no information about spin is in this equation. This needs careful consideration,
since spin must be an intrinsic part of a realtivistic equation!
Dirac realized that there was a way to define the square root of the operator. The trick he used was to
define four matrices α, β that each have the property that their square is one, and that they anticommute,
αi αi = I, ββ = I,
αi β + βαi = 0, αi αj + αj αi = 0 i 6= j. (6.5)
This then leads to an equation that is linear in the momenta – and very well behaved,
∂
(βmc2 + cα · p)Ψ = i~ Ψ (6.6)
∂t
49
50 CHAPTER 6. SOME BASIC CONCEPTS OF THEORETICAL PARTICLE PHYSICS
Note that the minimum dimension for the matrices in which we can satisfy all conditions is 4, and thus Ψ is
a four-vector! This is closely related to the fact that these particles have spin.
Let us investigate this equation a bit further. One of the possible forms of αi and β is
0 σi I 0
αi = , β= , (6.7)
σi 0 0 −I
(Note that the exponent is a “Lorentz scalar”, it is independent of the Lorentz frame!).
If substitute this solution we find that u(p) satisfies the eigenvalue equation
mc2 0 p3 c p1 c − ip2 c u1 u1
0 mc2 p1 c + ip2 c −p3 c u2 u2
p3 c p1 c − ip2 c −mc2 0 u3 = E u3 . (6.11)
p1 c + ip2 c −p3 c 0 −mc2 u4 u4
The eigenvalue problem can be solved easily, and we find the eigenvalue equation
(m2 c4 + p2 c2 − E 2 )2 = 0 (6.12)
p
which has the solutions E = ± m2 c4 + p2 c2 . The eigenvectors for the positive eigenvalues are
1 0
0 1
, and
p3 c/(E + mc )2 (p1 c + ip2 c)/(E + mc ) ,
2 (6.13)
(p1 c − ip2 c)/(E + mc2 ) −p3 c/(E + mc2 )
with similar expressions for the two eigenvectors for the negative energy solutions. In the limit of small
momentum the positive-energy eigenvectors become
1 0
0 1
, and , (6.14)
0 0
0 0
and seem to denote a particle with spin up and down. We shall show that the other two solutions are related
to the occurence of anti-particles (positrons).
Just as photons are the best way to analyze (decompose) the electro-magnetic field, electrons and positrons
are the natural way way to decompose the Dirac field that is the general solution of the Dirac equation.
This analysis of a solution in terms of the particles it contains is called (incorrectly, for historical reasons)
“second quantization”, and just means that there is a natural basis in which we can say there is a state at
energy E, which is either full or empty. This could more correctly be referred to as the “occupation number
representation” which should be familiar from condensed matter physics. This helps us to see how a particle
can be described by these wave equations. There is a remaining problem, however!
6.2 Antiparticles
Both the Klein-Gordon and the Dirac equation have a really nasty property. Since the relativistic energy
relation is quadratic, both equations have, for every positive energy solution, a negative energy solution. We
6.3. QED: PHOTON COUPLES TO E + E − 51
mc2
- mc2
don’t really wish to see such things, do we? Energies are always positive and this is a real problem. The
resolution is surprisingly simple, but also very profound – It requires us to look at the problem in a very
different light.
In figure 6.1 we have sketched the solutions for the Dirac equation for a free particle. It has a positive
energy spectrum starting at mc2 (you cannot have a particle at lower energy), but also a negative energy
spectrum below −mc2 . The interpretation of the positive energy states is natural – each state describes a
particle moving at an energy above mc2 . Since we cannot have negative energy states, their interpretation
must be very different. The solution is simple: We assume that in an empty vacuum all negative energy
states are filled (the “Dirac sea”). Excitations relative to the vacuum can now be obtained by adding particles
at positive energies, or creating holes at negative energies. Creating a hole takes energy, so the hole states
appear at positive energies. They do have opposite charge to the particle states, and thus would correspond
to positrons! This shows a great similarity to the behaviour of semiconductors, as you may well know. The
situation is explained in figure 6.2.
Note that we have ignored the infinite charge of the vacuum (actually, we subtract it away assuming
a constant positive background charge.) Removing infinities from calculations is a frequent occurrence in
relativistic quantum theory (RQT). Many unmeasurable quantities become infinite, and we are only interested
in the finite part remaining after removing the infinities. This process is part of what is called renormalisation,
which is a systematic procedure to extract finite information from infinite answers!
E E
mc2 mc2
0 0
- mc2 - mc2
Figure 6.2: A schematic picture of the occupied and empty levels in the Dirac equation. The promotion of a
particle to an empty level corresponds to the creation of a positron-electron pair, and takes an energy larger
than 2mc2 .
of feynman diagrams is that both these possibilities are described in one feynman diagram. Thus the time in
this diagram should only be interpreted in the sense of the external lines, what are the particles in and out.
It is also very economical if we have more and more particles emitted and aborbed.
Since the emitted photon only lives for a short time, ∆t = ∆x/c, its energy cannot be determined exactly
due to the uncertainty relation
~
∆E∆t ≥ . (6.16)
2
Thus even though the sum of the initial (four) momenta, k1 + k2 equals the sum of the final ones, k3 + k4 , we
find that the photon does not have to satisfy
q 2 = Eq2 − q 2 = 0. (6.17)
Such a photon is called virtual or “off mass-shell”, since it does not satisfy the mass-energy relations. This is
what gives rise to the Coulomb force.
e- e- e+ e+
γ γ
γ γ
e- e- e+ e+
(a) (b) (c) (d)
e-
e+
t
e+
γ
γ e-
(e) (f) x
Figure 6.3: The Feynman diagrams for an electron and/or positrons interacting with a photon. Diagram (a)
is emission of a photon by an electron, (b) absoption. (c) and (d) are the same diagrams for positrons, and
(e) is pair creation, whereas (f) is annihilation.
k3 k4
e- e-
γ q
t
e- e-
k1 k2
= +
+
+
= +
+
t
e- e+
e- e+
γ
γ
e- e+
e- e+
Some of the errors in the theory are related to our knowledge of constants such as ~, and require better input.
It is also clear that at some scale QCD (the theory of strong interactions) will start playing a rôle. We are
approaching that limit.
6.7 Problems
e- e+
e- e+
γ γ
e-
e+ e+
e-
γ γ
The fundamental forces are normally divided in four groups, of the four so-called “fundamental” forces. These
are often naturally classified with respect to a dimensionless measure of their strength. To set these dimensions
we use ~, c and the mass of the proton, mp . The natural classification is then given in table 7.1. Another
important property is their range: the distance to which the interaction can be felt, and the type of quantity
they couple to. Let me look a little closer at each of these in turn.
In order to set the scale we need to express everything in a natural set of units. Three scales are provided
by ~ and c and e – actually one usually works in units where these two quantities are 1 in high energy physics.
For the scale of mass we use the mass of the proton. In summary (for e = 1 we use electron volt as natural
unit of energy)
7.1 Gravity
The theory of gravity can be looked at in two ways: The old fashioned Newtonian gravity, where the potential
is proportional to the rest mass of the particles,
GN m1 m2
V = . (7.4)
r
There are two more levels to look at gravity. One of those is Einstein’s theory of gravity, which in the low-
energy small-mass limit reduces to Newton’s theory. This is still a classical theory, of a classical gravitational
field.
The quantum theory, where we reexpress the field in their quanta has proven to be a very tough stumbling
block – When one tries to generalise the approach taken for QED, every expression is infinite, and one needs
to define an infinite number of different infinite constants. This is not deemed to be acceptable – i.e., it doesn’t
define a theory. Such a model is called unrenormalisable. We may return to the problem of quantum gravity
later, time permitting.
57
58 CHAPTER 7. THE FUNDAMENTAL FORCES
7.2 Electromagnetism
Electro-magnetism, i.e., QED, has been discussed in some detail in the previous chapter. Look there for a
discussion. The coupling constant for the theory is
e2
α= . (7.6)
4π0 ~c
n → p + e− + ν e . (7.7)
The standard coupling for this theory is called the Fermi coupling, GF , after its discoverer. After the theory
was introduced it was learned that there were physical particles that mediate the weak force, the W ± and the
Z 0 bosons. These are very heavy particles (their mass is about 80 times the proton mass!), which is why they
have such a small range – fluctuations where I need to create that much mass are rare. The W ± bosons are
charged, and the Z 0 boson is neutral. The typical β decay referred to above is mediated by a W − boson as
can be seen in the Feynman diagram figure 7.1. The reason for this choice is that it conserves charge at each
point (the charge of a proton and a W − is zero, the charge of an electron and a neutrino is -1, the same as
that of a W − ).
p e- νe
W-
Figure 7.1: The Feynman diagram for the weak decay of a neutron.
Symmetries in physics provide a great fascination to us – one of the hang-ups of mankind. We can recognise a
symmetry easily, and they provide a great tool to classify shapes and patterns. There is an important area of
mathematics called group theory, where one studies the transformations under which an object is symmetric.
In order to make this statement seem less abstract, let me look at a simple example, a regular hexagon in a
plane. As can be seen in figure Fig. 8.5, this object is symmetric (i.e., we can’t distinguish the new from the
old object) under rotations around centre over angles of a multiple of 60◦ , and under reflection in any of the
six axes sketched in the second part of the figure.
• Boosts, where we go from one Lorentz frame to another, i.e., we change the velocity.
59
60 CHAPTER 8. SYMMETRIES AND PARTICLE PHYSICS
There is a slightly larger group of symmetries, called the Poincaré group, obtained when we add translations
to the set of symmetries – clearly the dynamics doesn’t care where we put the orbit of space.
The set of conserved quantities associated with this group is large. Translational and boost invariance
implies conservation of four momentum, and rotational invariance implies conservation of angular momentum.
8.4.1 Parity P
1.0
n=0 n=1
0.5
φ 0.0
−0.5
−1.0
1.0
n=2 n=3
0.5
φ 0.0
−0.5
−1.0
−4 −2 0 2 −4 −2 0 2 4
x x
Parity is the transformation where we reflect each point in the origin, x → −x. This transformation should
be familiar to you. Let us think of the one dimensional harmonic oscillator, with Hamiltonian
~2 d
− + 12 mω 2 x2 . (8.2)
2m dx2
The Hamiltonian does not change under the substitution x → −x. The well-known eigenstates to this problem
are either even or odd under this transformation, see Fig. 8.2, and thus have either even or odd parity,
P ψ(x, t) = ψ(−x, t) = ±ψ(x, t), (8.3)
where P is the transformation that take x → −x. For
P ψ(x, t) = ψ(x, t) (8.4)
we say that the state has even parity, for the minus sign we speak about negative parity. These are the only
two allowed eigenvalues, as can be seen from looking at the probability density |ψ(x, y)|2 . Since this must be
invariant, we find that
|ψ(x, y)|2 = |P ψ(x, y)|2 (8.5)
8.5. THE CP T THEOREM 61
which shows that the only real eigenvalues for P are ±1. One can show that there is a relation between parity
and the orbital angular momentum quantum number L, π = (−1)L , which relates two space-time symmetries.
It is found, however, that parity also has an intrinsic part, which is associated with each type of particle.
A photon (γ) has negative parity. This can be understood from the following classical analogy. When we look
at Maxwell’s equation for the electric field,
1
∇ · E(x, t) = ρ(x, t), (8.6)
0
we find that upon releversal of the coordinates this equation becomes
1
−∇ · E(−x, t) = ρ(−x, t). (8.7)
0
The additional minus sign, which originates in the change of sign of ∇ is what gives the electric field and thus
the photon its negative intrinsic parity.
We shall also wish to understand the parity of particles and antiparticles. For fermions (electrons, protons,
. . . ) we have the interesting relation Pf Pf¯ = −1, which will come in handy later!
Combined with its intrinsic part we find that it has eigenvalues ±i for fermions (electrons, etc.) and ±1 for
bosons (photons, etc.).
8.6 CP violation
60
The first experimental confirmation of symmetry breaking was found when studying the β − decay of Co,
60
Co → 60 Ni + e− + ν̄e . (8.10)
This nucleus has a ground state with non-zero spin, which can be oriented in a magnetic field.
A magnetic field is a pseudo-vector, which means that under parity it goes over into itself B → B. So
does the spin of the nucleus, and we thus have established that under parity the situation under which the
nucleus emits electrons should be invariant. But the direction in which they are emitted changes! Thus any
asymmetry between the emission of electrons parallel and anti-parallel to the field implies parity breaking, as
sketched in figure 8.3.
e- e-
e- e-
e- e-
parity mirror
60
Figure 8.3: Parity breaking for the β decay of Co
Actually one can shown that to high accuracy that the product of C and P is conserved, as can be seen in
figure 8.4.
60 e-
Co
e-
P C
e-
60 e- 60 e+
Co Co
e- CP e+
e- e+
60 e+
Co
C P
e+
e+
60
Figure 8.4: CP symmetry for the β decay of Co
8.7. CONTINUOUS SYMMETRIES 63
on a wave function. This is slightly simpler for a particle without spin, since we shall only have to consider
the orbital angular momentum,
L̂ = p̂ × r = i~r × ∇. (8.12)
Notice that this is still very complicated, exponentials of operators are not easy to deal with. One of the lessons
we learn from applying this operator to many different states, is that if a state has good angular momentum J,
the rotation can transform it into another state of angular momentum J, but it will never change the angular
momentum. This is most easily seen by labelling the states by J, M :
h i
Jˆx2 + Jˆy2 + Jˆz2 φJM = ~2 J(J + 1)φJM (8.13)
Jˆz2 φJM = M φJM (8.14)
The quantum number M can take the values −J, −J + 1, . . . , J − 1, J, so that we typically have 2J + 1
components for each J. The effect of the exponential transformation on a linear combination of states of
identical J is to perform a linear transformation between these components. I shall show in a minute that
such transformation can be implemented by unitary matrices. The transformations that implement these
transformations are said to correspond to an irreducible representation of the rotation group (often denoted
by SO(3)).
Let us look at the simplest example, for spin 1/2. We have two states, one with spin up and one with
spin down, ψ± . If the initial state is ψ = α+ ψ+ + α− ψ− , the effect of a rotation can only be to turn this into
ψ 0 = α+ 0
ψ+ + α−0
ψ− . Since the transformation is linear (if I rotate the sum of two objects, I might as well
rotate both of them) we find
0 0
α+ U++ U−+ α+
0 = 0 (8.15)
α− U+− U−− α−
R
Since
R the transformation
R can not change the length of the vector, we must have |ψ 0 |2 = 1. Assuming
|ψ± |2 = 1, ψ+ ∗
ψ− = 0 we find
U †U = 1 (8.16)
with
∗ ∗
U++ U+−
U† = ∗ ∗ (8.17)
U−+ U−−
the so-called hermitian conjugate.
We can write down matrices that in the space of S = 1/2 states behave the same as the angular momentum
operators. These are half the well known Pauli matrices
0 1 0 −i 1 0
σx = , σy = , σz = . (8.18)
1 0 i 0 0 −1
I don’t really want to discuss how to evaluate the exponent of a matrix, apart from one special case. Suppose
we perform a 2π rotation around the z axis, θ = (0, 0, 2π). We find
1 0
U (0, 0, 2π) = exp[iπ ]. (8.20)
0 −1
64 CHAPTER 8. SYMMETRIES AND PARTICLE PHYSICS
Since this matrix is diagonal, we just have to evaluate the exponents for each of the entries (this corresponds
to using the Taylor series of the exponential),
exp[iπ] 0
U (0, 0, 2π) =
0 exp[−iπ]
−1 0
= . (8.21)
0 −1
To our surprise this does not take me back to where I started from. Let me make a small demonstration to
show what this means.........
Finally what happens if we combine states from two irreducible representations? Let me analyse this for
two spin 1/2 states,
1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2
ψ = (α+ ψ+ + α− ψ− )(α+ ψ+ + α− ψ− )
1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2
= α+ α+ ψ+ ψ+ + α+ α− ψ+ ψ− + α− α+ ψ− ψ+ α− α− ψ− ψ− . (8.22)
The first and the last product of ψ states have an angular momentum component ±1 in the z direction, and
must does at least have J = 1. The middle two combinations with both have M = M1 + M2 = 0 can be shown
to be a combination of a J = 1, M = 0 and a J = 0, M = 0 state. Specifically,
1 1 2 1 2
√ ψ+ ψ − − ψ− ψ+ (8.23)
2
transforms as a scalar, it goes over into itself. the way to see that is to use the fact that these states transform
with the same U , and substitute these matrices. The result is proportional to where we started from. Notice
that the triplet (S = 1) is symmetric under interchange of the two particles, whereas the singlet (S = 0)
is antisymmetric. This relation between symmetry can be exhibited as in the diagrams Fig. ??, where the
horizontal direction denotes symmetry, and the vertical direction denotes antisymmetry. This technique works
for all unitary groups.....
x = +
Figure 8.5: The Young tableau for the multiplication 1/2 × 1/2 = 0 + 1.
The coupling of angular momenta is normally performed through Clebsch-Gordan coefficients, as denoted
by
hj1 m1 j2 m2 |JM i . (8.24)
We know that M = m1 + m2 . Further analysis shows that J can take on all values |j1 − j2 |, |j1 − j2 | + 1, |j1 −
j2 | + 2, j1 + j2.
ψ → Uψ
U11 U12 U13 ψ1
= U21 U22 U23 ψ2 (8.25)
U31 U32 U33 ψ3
8.10. BROKEN SYMMETRIES 65
ψ∗ → ψ∗ U † , (8.26)
with the inverse of the matrix. Clearly the fundamental representation of the group, where the matrices repre-
senting the transformation are just the matrix transformations, the vectors have length 3. The representation
is usually labelled by its number of basis elements as 3. The one the transforms under the inverse matrices is
usually denoted by 3̄.
What happens if we combine two of these objects, ψ and χ∗ ? It is easy to see that the inner product of ψ
and χ∗ is scalar,
χ∗ · ψ → χ∗ U † U ψ = χ∗ · ψ, (8.27)
where we have used the unitary properties of the matrices the remaining 8 components can all be shown to
transform amongst themselves, and we write
3 ⊗ 3̄ = 1 ⊕ 8. (8.28)
3 ⊗ 3 ⊗ 3 = 1 ⊕ 8 ⊕ 8 ⊕ 10. (8.29)
Table 8.1: The four fundamental forces and their gauge particles
Gravitation graviton(?)
QED photon
Weak W ±, Z 0
Strong gluons
66 CHAPTER 8. SYMMETRIES AND PARTICLE PHYSICS
Chapter 9
The first time people realised the key role of symmetries was in the plethora of particles discovered using
the first accelerators. Many of those were composite particle (to be explained later) bound by the strong
interaction.
This symmetry is reinforced by the discovery that the interactions between nucleon (p and n) is independent
of charge, they only depend on the nucleon character of these particles – the strong interactions see only one
nucleon and one pion. Clearly a continuous transformation between the nucleons and between the pions is a
symmetry. The symmetry that was proposed (by Wigner) is an internal symmetry like spin symmetry called
isotopic spin or isospin. It is an abstract rotation in isotopic space, and leads to similar type of states with
isotopic spin I = 1/2, 1, 3/2, . . .. One can define the third component of isospin as
B Q/e I I3
n 1 0 1/2 −1/2
p 1 1 1/2 1/2
(9.4)
π− 0 −1 1 −1
π0 0 0 1 0
π+ 0 1 1 1
Notice that the energy levels of these particles are split by a magnetic force, as ordinary spins split under a
magnetic force.
67
68 CHAPTER 9. SYMMETRIES OF THE THEORY OF STRONG INTERACTIONS
(Un)fortunately the number of highly energetic particles is very low, and we won’t see many events.) These
particles came in two forms: a neutral one that decayed into a π + and a π − , and a positively charge one that
decayed into a µ+ (heavy electron) and a photon, as sketched in figure 9.1.
π+
0
V
π−
µ+
+
V
The big surprise about these particles was how long they lived. There are many decay time scales, but
typically the decay times due to strong interactions are very fast, of the order of a femto second (10−15 s). The
decay time of the K mesons was about 10−10 s, much more typical of a weak decay. Many similar particles
have since been found, both of mesonic and baryonic type (like pions or like nucleons). These are collectively
know as strange particles. Actually, using accelerators it was found that strange particles are typically formed
in pairs, e.g.,
π + + p → |{z}
Λ0 + |{z}
K 0 meson (9.5)
baryon
This mechanism was called associated production, and is highly suggestive of an additive conserved quantity,
such as charge, called strangeness. If we assume that the Λ0 has strangeness −1, and the K0 +1, this balances
π+ + p → Λ0 + K 0 (9.6)
0+0 = −1 + 1 (9.7)
Λ0 → π− + p (9.8)
−1 6= 0 + 0, (9.9)
does not conserve strangeness (but it conserves baryon number). This process is indeed found to take much
longer, about 10−10 s.
Actually it is found (by analysing many resonance particles) that we can accommodate this quantity in
our definition of isospin,
B+S
Q = e(I3 + ) (9.10)
2
Clearly for S = −1 and B = 1 we get a particle with I3 = 0. This allows us to identify the Λ0 as an I = 0, I3=0
particle, which agrees with the fact that there are no particles of different charge and a similar mass and strong
interaction properties.
The kaons come in three charge states K ± , K 0 with masses mK ± = 494 MeV, mK 0 = 498 MeV. In
similarity with pions, which form an I = 1 multiplet, we would like to assume a I = 1 multiplet of K’s as well.
This is problematic since we have to assume S = 1 for all these particles: we cannot satisfy
1
Q = e(I3 + ) (9.11)
2
for isospin 1 particles. The other possibility I = 3/2 doesn’t fit with only three particles. Further analysis
shows that the the K + is the antiparticle of K − , but K 0 is not its own antiparticle (which is true for the
9.2. STRANGE PARTICLES 69
S
0 +
K K
1
π
-
π
0
π
+
0
-1
- 0
K K
-1 0 1 I3
pions. So we need four particles, and the assignments are S = 1, I = 1/2 for K 0 and K − , S = −1, I = 1/2
for K + and K̄ 0 . Actually, we now realise that we can summarise all the information about K’s and π’s in one
multiplet, suggestive of a (pretty badly broken!) symmetry.
However, it is hard to find a sensible symmetry that gives a 7-dimensional multiplet. It was argued by
Gell-Mann and Ne’eman in 1961 that a natural extension of isospin symmetry would be an SU(3) symmetry.
We have argued before that one of the simplest representations of SU(3) is 8 dimensional symmetry. A
mathematical analysis shows that what is missing is a particle with I = I3 = S = 0. Such a particle is known,
and is called the η 0 . The breaking of the symmetry can be seen from the following mass table:
mπ± = 139 MeV
mπ 0 = 134 MeV
mK ± = 494 MeV
m(−) = 498 MeV
K0
mη 0 = 549 MeV
(9.12)
The resulting multiplet is often represented like in figure 9.3.
S
0 +
K K
1
π
-
π η
0 0
π
+
0
-1
- 0
K K
-1 0 1 I3
In order to have the scheme make sense we need to show its predictive power. This was done by studying
the nucleons and their excited states. Since nucleons have baryon number one, they are labelled with the
“hyper-charge” Y ,
Y = (B + S), (9.13)
70 CHAPTER 9. SYMMETRIES OF THE THEORY OF STRONG INTERACTIONS
rather than S. The nucleons form an octet with the single-strangeness particles Λ and σ and the doubly-strange
cascade particle Ξ, see figure 9.4.
Y
n p
1
Σ
-
Σ Λ
0 0
Σ
+
0
-1
- 0
Ξ Ξ
-1 0 1 I3
Mn = 938 MeV
Mp = 939 MeV
MΛ 0 = 1115 MeV
MΣ+ = 1189 MeV
MΣ0 = 1193 MeV
MΣ− = 1197 MeV
M Ξ0 = 1315 MeV
MΞ− = 1321 MeV
All these particles were known before the idea of this symmetry. The first confirmation came when studying
the excited states of the nucleon. Nine states were easily incorporated in a decuplet, and the tenth state (the
Ω− , with strangeness -3) was predicted. It was found soon afterwards at the predicted value of the mass.
Y
∆ ∆ ∆ ∆
- 0 + ++
1
Σ Σ
*- *0
Σ
*+
0
Ξ
*-
Ξ
*0
-1
Ω
-
-2
-1 0 1
I3
M∆ = 1232 MeV
MΣ∗ = 1385 MeV
MΞ∗ = 1530 MeV
MΩ = 1672 MeV
(Notice almost that we can fit these masses as a linear function in Y , as can be seen in figure 9.6. This was
of great help in finding the Ω.)
1.7
1.6
Mc (GeV)
1.5
2
1.4
1.3
1.2
−2 −1 0 1
Y
3 ⊗ 3 ⊗ 3 = 1 ⊕ 8 ⊕ 8 ⊕ 10. (9.14)
A very natural assumption is to introduce a new particle that comes in three “flavours” called up, down and
strange (u, d and s, respectively), and assume that the baryons are made from three of such particles, and the
mesons from a quark and anti-quark (remember,
3 ⊗ 3̄ = 1 ⊕ 8. ) (9.15)
Each of these quarks carries one third a unit of baryon number. The properties can now be tabulated, see
table 9.2.
In the multiplet language I used before, we find that the quarks form a triangle, as given in Fig. 9.7.
Once we have made this assigment, we can try to derive what combination corresponds to the assignments
of the meson octet, figure 9.8. We just make all possible combinations of a quark and antiquark, apart from
the scalar one η 0 = uū + dd¯ + cc̄ (why?).
A similar assignment can be made for the nucleon octet, and the nucleon decaplet, see e.g., see Fig. 9.9.
72 CHAPTER 9. SYMMETRIES OF THE THEORY OF STRONG INTERACTIONS
1 1
s
d u
Y Y
0 0
u d
-1 -1
s
-1 0 1 I3 -1 0 1 I3
S
ds us
1
uu-dd
0 ud ud
uu+dd-2ss
-1
us ds
-1 0 1 I3
9.4 SU (4), . . .
Once we have three flavours of quarks, we can ask the question whether more flavours exists. At the moment
we know of three generations of quarks, corresponding to three generations (pairs). These give rise to SU(4),
SU(5), SU(6) flavour symmetries. Since the quarks get heavier and heavier, the symmetries get more-and-more
broken as we add flavours.
This would be symmetric under interchange, which is unacceptable. Actually there is a simple solution. We
“just” assume that there is an additional quantity called colour, and take the colour wave function to be
antisymmetric:
ψtotal = ψspace × ψspin × ψflavour × ψcolour (9.17)
9.6. THE FEYNMAN DIAGRAMS OF QCD 73
Y
udd uud
1
-1
dss uss
-1 0 1 I3
We assume that quarks come in three colours. This naturally leads to yet another SU (3) symmetry, which is
actually related to the gauge symmetry of strong interactions, QCD. So we have shifted the question to: why
can’t we see coloured particles?
This is a deep and very interesting problem. The only particles that have been seen are colour neutral
(“white”) ones. This leads to the assumption of confinement – We cannot liberate coloured particles at “low”
energies and temperatures! The question whether they are free at higher energies is an interesting question,
and is currently under experimental consideration.
1. Quarks interact more strongly the further they are apart, and more weakly as they are close by –
assymptotic freedom.
The first point can only be found through detailed mathematical analysis. It means that free quarks can’t be
seen, but at high energies quarks look more and more like free particles. The second statement make QCD
so hard to solve. The gluon comes in 8 colour combinations (since it carries a colour and anti-colour index,
minus the scalar combination). The relevant diagrams are sketches in Figure 9.11. Try to work out yourself
how we satisfy colour charge conservation!
( u u u
)
( u u u
)
Figure 9.10: The ∆++ in the quark model.
q g g g
g g
q g g g
Figure 9.11: The basic building blocks for QCD feynman diagrams
quarks. These are all “hadrons”, mesons and baryons, since they must couple through the strong interaction.
By determining the energy in each if the two jets we can discover the energy of the initial quarks, and see
whether QCD makes sense.
Chapter 10
Relativistic kinematics
One of the features of particle physics is the importance of special relativity. This occurs at a very fundamental
level, since particle physics is all about creating and annihilating particles. This can only occur if we can
convert mass to energy and vice-versa. Thus Einstein’s idea of the equivalnece between mass and energy
plays an extremely fundamental rôle in this field of physics. In order for this to be possible we typically
need processes that occur at velocities near the light velocity c, so that the kinematics (i.e., the description
of momemnta and energy) of these processes requires relativity. In this chapter we shall succintly introduce
the few necessary concepts – I hope that for most of you this is a review, but this chapter is intended to be
self-contained and contains everything I shall need in relativistic kinematics.
75
76 CHAPTER 10. RELATIVISTIC KINEMATICS
and is thus, apart from the factor 1/c2 , nothing but the energy in the CM frame. For a single particle W = m0 ,
the rest mass.
Most considerations about processes in high energy physics are greatly simplified by concentrating on the
invariant mass. This removes the Lorentz-frame dependence of writing four momenta. I
As an exmaple we look at the collision of a proton and an antiproton at rest, where we produce two quanta
of electromagnetic radiation (γ’s), see fig. 10.1, where the anti proton has three-momentum (p, 0, 0), and the
proton is at rest.
γ
p p
γ
Figure 10.1: A sketch of a collision between a proton with velocity v and an antiproton at rest producing two
gamma quanta.
plab mp c, (10.9)
we find that q
W ≈ 2mp plab /c, (10.10)
which energy needs to be shared between the two photons, in equal parts. We could also have chosen to work
in the CM frame, where the calculations get a lot easier.
t
b t
b
We first need to determine the velocity v of the Lorentz transformation that bring is to the centre-of-mass
frame. We use the Lorentz transformation rules for momenta to find that in a Lorentz frame moving with
velocity v along the x-axis relative to the CM frame we have
Sine in the CM frame these numbers must be equal in sizebut opposite in sign, we find a linear equation for
v, with solution
plab mt
v= ≈c 1− . (10.14)
mt + Elab /c2 plab
Now if we know the momentum of the beam particle in the CM frame after collision,
where θCM is the CM scattering angle we can use the inverse Lorentz transformation, with velocity −v, to try
and find the lab momentum and scattering angle,
Here u is the velocity of the particle in the CM frame. This function is always strongly peaked in the forward
direction unless u ≈ c and cos θC ≈ −1.
10.4 Elastic-inelastic
We shall often be interested in cases where we transfer both energy and momentum from one particle to
another, i.e., we have inelastic collissions where particles change their character – e.g., their rest-mass. If we
have, as in Fig. 10.3, two particles with energy-momentum k1 and pq coming in, and two with k2 and p2
coming out, We know that since energy and momenta are conserved, that k1 + p1 = k2 + p2 , which can be
rearranged to give
p2 = p1 + q, k2 = k1 − q. (10.19)
and shows energy and momentum getting transferred. This picture will occur quite often!
78 CHAPTER 10. RELATIVISTIC KINEMATICS
10.5 Problems
π + = µ+ + νµ . (10.20)
Express the momentum of the muon and the neutrino in terms of the mass of pion and muon. Assume that
the neutrino mass is zero, and that the pion is at rest. Calculate the momentum using mπ+ = 139.6 MeV/c2 ,
mµ = 105.7 MeV/c2 .
3. Calculate the lowest energy at which a Λ(1115) can be produced in a collision of (negative) pions
with protons at rest, throught the reaction π − + p → K 0 + Λ. mπ− = 139.6 MeV/c2 , mp = 938.3 MeV/c2 ,
mK 0 = 497.7 MeV/c2 . (Hint: the mass of the Λ is 1115 MeV/c2 .)
4. a) Find the maximum value for v such that the relativisitic energy can be expressed by
p2
E ≈ mc2 + , (10.21)
2m
with an error of one procent.
b) find the minimum value of v and γ so that the relativisitic energy can be expressed by
E ≈ pc, (10.22)